It might be of some comfort to England to accept that their stunning defeat by Ireland in the World Cup was some way down the list of sports shocks suffered by that nation. It was inevitable that England, the country which gave so many sports to the world in the 19th century, would eventually, one by one, give best to other countries.
Losing a Test match on home territory to Australia for the first time, at The Oval in 1882, is still acknowledged as an upset of stupendous proportions. The little Ashes urn remains a world-famous symbol of the Old Country’s revenge in the return series a few months later.
The argument as to England’s most stunning reversal in sport has been revived at regular intervals over many years, and this World Cup upset at the Chinnaswamy Stadium is the latest example.
Yet, cricket has always overflowed with examples of the unexpected. And the shorter the game the more likely the upset. This is what lends such excitement to Twenty20 cricket. Goliath is often a little smaller and David can become somewhat larger in such a short contest. By contrast, over the five days of a Test match, it is a much rarer occurrence for the lesser side to overthrow the greater. That’s not to say it has never happened.
When a “small fry” does manage to beat a “big fella”, whether in the longer contest or the shorter, there has to have been an extraordinary performance by one or two players in the “minor” team — refer Kevin O’Brien’s thundering 50-ball Bangalore hundred — which is often coupled with under-performance by the so-called stronger team. England’s bowling on Wednesday was neither intelligent nor energetic. The poor devils are worn out after their stupendous efforts in Australia. For Ireland’s victory this week they have much to thank the ICC planners and schedulers.
Yes, sport’s attraction is partly founded on the occasional unexpected result, and England have plenty in the history books to reflect upon, such as their 0-1 football World Cup defeat by USA at Belo Horizonte, Brazil in 1950. Three years later another bastion fell when England lost at home for the first time ever, the magical Hungarians winning 6-3 at Wembley Stadium.
Whenever England play one of the other “home countries” at Association football or Rugby Union, deep-rooted emotions and prejudice sometimes emerge. Incidents on the broad expanse of turf can easily generate a slightly irrational reflection upon ancient and immensely more serious encounters between the countries.
How fiercely the Welsh can seem to hate the English at times like these, a feeling aroused by tales of battlefield conflicts centuries ago. The same goes for England v Scotland matches.Banners with “Remember Bannockburn” or “Culloden” have been seen, farcical reflections on ancient massacres inflicted by these neighbouring peoples centuries ago.
As for England vs Ireland “combat” at either of the football codes, there is dramatic “history” embedded here as well. It is unhealthy and illogical to match serious history with a sporting event. But try telling that to an Irish person who lost an ancestor or two to the Great Famine or English military brutality in the 19th century. Again, it had nothing to do with Andrew Strauss, let alone Jimmy Anderson or Stuart Broad.
These tribal perceptions explain why victory in any of these sports contests tastes far sweeter than other matches played against a less complex historical background. But there are still many such half-hidden powerful motivations. West Indies batsman Vivian Richards was the most obvious example of a man strongly motivated by race and history. Knowledge of how the English ran a cruel slave trade between Africa and the Caribbean affected him more deeply than the fact that it was an Englishman who carried the movement for emancipation. Had he been around when Ireland inflicted their shock cricket defeat of the West Indians in 1969 he might not have minded all that much.
I doubt that Kevin O’Brien and his teammates had any history agenda in their mental make-up when they toppled England on the cricket field on Wednesday. But if it did help fire them up, so be it. I remember Danny Blanchflower’s remark on television the morning of England’s 1966 football World Cup victory over Germany at the old Wembley Stadium, “We have beaten ’em in two World Wars so I don’t see why we can’t beat ’em today!” The Northern Irishman was smartly whisked away from the camera, but people nodded and chuckled all across England.
India and Pakistan know about these sorts of things. The situation now is such that India play against neighbours Pakistan only rarely in World Cups of 50-overs or Twenty20 matches. It is still debatable whether the intensity of those matches is greater than when England play Ireland or Wales or Scotland. I have memories of players in Indo-Pak matches some years ago going overboard in their desire to demonstrate friendliness and a kind of reconciliation. Younger folk may find it incredible that Hindus, Muslims and Europeans once used to play alongside each other under the flag of India. This is the true virtue of sport. It should be the opposite of war. That is what the English schoolmasters in Queen Victoria’s time crafted it to be. But that was so very long ago. Sport is used now as a source of moneymaking and ferocious national pride. Such exploitation is a disgrace to the memory of the founding fathers, who saw sport as a means of improving mental and physical fitness and advancing friendship, whether between schools or ultimately nations. The Olympic ideal has long been shattered by an almost fanatical national pride and colossal financial investment.
But we mustn’t get too serious. Cricket is rarely smeared by excesses of patriotism. In Bangalore this week we saw refreshing Irish joy which much of the outside world will have shared.There weren’t all that many of the shaken fists and gaping mouths that have become the ugliest of symbols of modern sport.
So, was Ireland’s victory the biggest shock ever suffered by English cricket? Well, to put it in perspective, it was probably the biggest since the Netherlands won under the floodlights at Lord’s in that Twenty20 match in June 2009.The Irishmen beat Pakistan on St Patrick’s Day four years ago, a victory overshadowed by the mysterious death of Pakistan’s English coach Bob Woolmer later that night.
Ireland’s triumph over poor exhausted old England has deeper significance. It also has a poignancy in view of the recent declaration that the non-Test countries will probably not be taking part in future World Cups.
Among the players, I wonder who enjoyed Ireland’s victory the most? It might well have been Ed Joyce, the Dubliner who used to play for England. Meanwhile, his colleague Eoin Morgan is one of England’s top ODI players, whose presence at Bangalore might, by way of contradiction, have made the vital difference. Yet if Morgan was watching this sensational match I am sure he would have felt very Irish that night.It would not have been natural were it otherwise. Complicated, isn’t it? How many of Ireland’s heroes (so many of whom play in county cricket) might now be tempted to try to qualify for England in order to play Test cricket?
Let’s calm down now. Let’s see how Ireland fare in the rest of the 2011 World Cup. While England fell apart at Bangalore and seem outsiders now, much sterner opposition seems to lie ahead for Ireland.
Neutrals such as myself will almost certainly be wanting them to triumph again. After all, last Sunday’s tie between India and England at the same blessed venue left me feeling quite Anglo-Indian!
David Frith’s latest book, Frith on Cricket (Great Northern Books), is a collection of his writings from the past half-century
Losing a Test match on home territory to Australia for the first time, at The Oval in 1882, is still acknowledged as an upset of stupendous proportions. The little Ashes urn remains a world-famous symbol of the Old Country’s revenge in the return series a few months later.
The argument as to England’s most stunning reversal in sport has been revived at regular intervals over many years, and this World Cup upset at the Chinnaswamy Stadium is the latest example.
Yet, cricket has always overflowed with examples of the unexpected. And the shorter the game the more likely the upset. This is what lends such excitement to Twenty20 cricket. Goliath is often a little smaller and David can become somewhat larger in such a short contest. By contrast, over the five days of a Test match, it is a much rarer occurrence for the lesser side to overthrow the greater. That’s not to say it has never happened.
When a “small fry” does manage to beat a “big fella”, whether in the longer contest or the shorter, there has to have been an extraordinary performance by one or two players in the “minor” team — refer Kevin O’Brien’s thundering 50-ball Bangalore hundred — which is often coupled with under-performance by the so-called stronger team. England’s bowling on Wednesday was neither intelligent nor energetic. The poor devils are worn out after their stupendous efforts in Australia. For Ireland’s victory this week they have much to thank the ICC planners and schedulers.
Yes, sport’s attraction is partly founded on the occasional unexpected result, and England have plenty in the history books to reflect upon, such as their 0-1 football World Cup defeat by USA at Belo Horizonte, Brazil in 1950. Three years later another bastion fell when England lost at home for the first time ever, the magical Hungarians winning 6-3 at Wembley Stadium.
Whenever England play one of the other “home countries” at Association football or Rugby Union, deep-rooted emotions and prejudice sometimes emerge. Incidents on the broad expanse of turf can easily generate a slightly irrational reflection upon ancient and immensely more serious encounters between the countries.
How fiercely the Welsh can seem to hate the English at times like these, a feeling aroused by tales of battlefield conflicts centuries ago. The same goes for England v Scotland matches.Banners with “Remember Bannockburn” or “Culloden” have been seen, farcical reflections on ancient massacres inflicted by these neighbouring peoples centuries ago.
As for England vs Ireland “combat” at either of the football codes, there is dramatic “history” embedded here as well. It is unhealthy and illogical to match serious history with a sporting event. But try telling that to an Irish person who lost an ancestor or two to the Great Famine or English military brutality in the 19th century. Again, it had nothing to do with Andrew Strauss, let alone Jimmy Anderson or Stuart Broad.
These tribal perceptions explain why victory in any of these sports contests tastes far sweeter than other matches played against a less complex historical background. But there are still many such half-hidden powerful motivations. West Indies batsman Vivian Richards was the most obvious example of a man strongly motivated by race and history. Knowledge of how the English ran a cruel slave trade between Africa and the Caribbean affected him more deeply than the fact that it was an Englishman who carried the movement for emancipation. Had he been around when Ireland inflicted their shock cricket defeat of the West Indians in 1969 he might not have minded all that much.
I doubt that Kevin O’Brien and his teammates had any history agenda in their mental make-up when they toppled England on the cricket field on Wednesday. But if it did help fire them up, so be it. I remember Danny Blanchflower’s remark on television the morning of England’s 1966 football World Cup victory over Germany at the old Wembley Stadium, “We have beaten ’em in two World Wars so I don’t see why we can’t beat ’em today!” The Northern Irishman was smartly whisked away from the camera, but people nodded and chuckled all across England.
India and Pakistan know about these sorts of things. The situation now is such that India play against neighbours Pakistan only rarely in World Cups of 50-overs or Twenty20 matches. It is still debatable whether the intensity of those matches is greater than when England play Ireland or Wales or Scotland. I have memories of players in Indo-Pak matches some years ago going overboard in their desire to demonstrate friendliness and a kind of reconciliation. Younger folk may find it incredible that Hindus, Muslims and Europeans once used to play alongside each other under the flag of India. This is the true virtue of sport. It should be the opposite of war. That is what the English schoolmasters in Queen Victoria’s time crafted it to be. But that was so very long ago. Sport is used now as a source of moneymaking and ferocious national pride. Such exploitation is a disgrace to the memory of the founding fathers, who saw sport as a means of improving mental and physical fitness and advancing friendship, whether between schools or ultimately nations. The Olympic ideal has long been shattered by an almost fanatical national pride and colossal financial investment.
But we mustn’t get too serious. Cricket is rarely smeared by excesses of patriotism. In Bangalore this week we saw refreshing Irish joy which much of the outside world will have shared.There weren’t all that many of the shaken fists and gaping mouths that have become the ugliest of symbols of modern sport.
So, was Ireland’s victory the biggest shock ever suffered by English cricket? Well, to put it in perspective, it was probably the biggest since the Netherlands won under the floodlights at Lord’s in that Twenty20 match in June 2009.The Irishmen beat Pakistan on St Patrick’s Day four years ago, a victory overshadowed by the mysterious death of Pakistan’s English coach Bob Woolmer later that night.
Ireland’s triumph over poor exhausted old England has deeper significance. It also has a poignancy in view of the recent declaration that the non-Test countries will probably not be taking part in future World Cups.
Among the players, I wonder who enjoyed Ireland’s victory the most? It might well have been Ed Joyce, the Dubliner who used to play for England. Meanwhile, his colleague Eoin Morgan is one of England’s top ODI players, whose presence at Bangalore might, by way of contradiction, have made the vital difference. Yet if Morgan was watching this sensational match I am sure he would have felt very Irish that night.It would not have been natural were it otherwise. Complicated, isn’t it? How many of Ireland’s heroes (so many of whom play in county cricket) might now be tempted to try to qualify for England in order to play Test cricket?
Let’s calm down now. Let’s see how Ireland fare in the rest of the 2011 World Cup. While England fell apart at Bangalore and seem outsiders now, much sterner opposition seems to lie ahead for Ireland.
Neutrals such as myself will almost certainly be wanting them to triumph again. After all, last Sunday’s tie between India and England at the same blessed venue left me feeling quite Anglo-Indian!
David Frith’s latest book, Frith on Cricket (Great Northern Books), is a collection of his writings from the past half-century
